Daily Archives: Sunday, February 8, 2009

A spot of light for Paul?

Stan Collender offers the most cheerful assessment I’ve seen for a while — not about the economy, or about the disappointing stimulus plan, but about Obama’s prospects for getting more on a second round. Collender says that in the months ahead there will be several opportunities to introduce new spending in a way that isn’t subject to a filibuster.

I hope he’s right, and that Obama has not shot his bolt. Because what’s coming out of the current deliberations is really, really inadequate. I’ve gone through the CBO numbers a bit more carefully; they’re projecting a $2.9 trillion shortfall over the next three years. There’s just no way $780 billion, much of it used unproductively, will do the job.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/happy-stan/

Shakin’ the tree (and why the hell not?)

Who ain’t up there?

Clapton and Dr. John

$4.4 million sitting under the dust

 Associated Press report:

A car abandoned in a garage in Britain for half a century sold at an auction in Paris for euro3.4 million (about $4.4 million) Friday.

The 1937 Bugatti Type 57S went under the hammer at Bonhams’ Retromobile car show and sale in Paris. It was sold on behalf of the family of its last owner, Dr Harold Carr.

The orthopedic surgeon drove the car for several years, but in the early 1960s it was parked in his garage in Gosforth, near Newcastle in northern England, where it remained for nearly 50 years until his death in 2007.

Ought to be short work for Focus on the Family focused prayer power

 The Navy says its third attempt to free a $1 billion warship that ran aground off the coast of Hawaii has failed.

Tugboats and a salvage ship tried unsuccessfully for four hours early Sunday to pull the USS Port Royal off a rock and sand shoal. The guided missile cruiser ran aground Thursday about a half-mile south of the Honolulu airport.

Pacific Fleet spokeswoman Agnes Tauyan says the Navy is reassessing its options.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/02/08/us/AP-Ship-Grounding.html

Here’s another big surprise

Republicans are making another run at overturning a ban on unlimited ”soft money” contributions. Their Democratic rivals say it is an attempt to bring big money back to politics because the GOP can’t keep up with President Barack Obama’s fundraising machine. 

continue reading here: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/02/08/washington/AP-Campaign-Finance-Lawsuit.html?_r=1

No, it is a center-left nation

THE ZOGBY/LEAR CENTER SURVEY FINDS
THIS IS A “CENTER-LEFT” COUNTRY

Read Marty Kaplan’s Center-Right Hype vs. Center-Left Data in the Huffington Post.

A rousing debate about whether this country leans to the right or the left has clogged the blogosphere and cable TV as 2008 comes to a close. Sadly, very little data is cited in these often virulent exchanges. In order to answer the question, “Is this a center-right or a center-left nation?” the Lear Center crunched the numbers from a survey conducted in August 2008, with Zogby International, which diagnosed the ideological profile of respondents. Here’s what we found:

Survey methodology

The Norman Lear Center and Zogby International conducted an extensive national survey examining political beliefs and entertainment preferences. The online survey was conducted August 19–28, 2008, including 3,167 adults nationwide and carrying a margin of error of +/– 1.8 percentage points. Using statistical clustering analysis, we created a political typology based on how respondents evaluated 42 statements about political values. The typology revealed three significant clusters of respondents: “reds,” as we decided to call them, make up 41% of the national sample, while “blues” comprise 34% and “purples” 24%. The same respondents were asked about their preferred leisure-time activities and their favorite radio and TV shows, Web sites, movies, games and sports.

What sets our survey apart?

The Zogby/Lear Center Survey typology reveals the ideological terrain of the United States in a way that no other poll does. Most surveys ask respondents their party identification and their candidate preferences; the result is poll after poll describing a nation essentially split in two, with five to ten percent “undecided.” Respondents to this survey also divided into two large groups when asked about the candidate they’d vote for (46% Obama, 46% McCain, 4% someone else, 4% not sure). But by allowing respondents also to weigh in on a wide variety of social and political issues, the Zogby/Lear Center Survey uncovers a nation split not in two, but rather in three. A full 24% of respondents did not align with the political beliefs and values of Reds, who could be considered “conservative,” or Blues, who could be labeled “liberal.” And party identification – especially the Independent moniker – is less revealing about an individual’s ideological profile than the Red/Blue/Purple typology groups. Twenty-three percent of Reds, 31% of Purples, and 18% of Blues identify as Independents.

Who are the purples? When we analyzed responses to the 42 statements in the typology, a statistically significant group of respondents emerged that did not cluster at either end of the ideological spectrum. These respondents composed a third group that leaned to the red end of the spectrum on eight issues, and leaned to the blue end of the spectrum on 12 issues (they were split 50/50 on one issue, whether religion should be left out of public life). Since this group inhabits the ideological middle-ground in our survey, it is reasonable to say that they represent the political center in this country.

So what does this center look like? First, this group accounts for almost 1 in 4 Americans (24%). Fifty-six percent of the time, a majority of these “centrists” endorsed the ideological statement embraced by Blues; 44% of the time they endorsed the Red statement.

Claim: The entire country leans left

Since our survey found that the largest ideological group has typically conservative beliefs (41%), one might assume that the ideological center in this country is to be found on the right side of the ideological spectrum. However, the size of one ideological group is not the best way to judge whether a majority of Americans tilt to the left or the right. In order to figure out whether we’re a “center-left” or “center-right” country, we needed to look at members of all the ideological groups in order to see how often they endorsed left or right wing positions. First, we looked at the 21 statements that had majority support from the entire sample (whether the respondents were Reds, Purples or Blues). We then calculated the average number of respondents who supported the Blue or liberal position and those who supported the Red or conservative position. The result? Fifty-two percent were Blue and 48% were Red.

There were two main reasons why Blue positions earned majority support, even though the Red group was the largest of the three. First, the Purple group held a Blue position more often than a Red one, by a margin of 19%. (They choose the Blue position 12 times, the Red position 8 times, and there was one tie) Secondly, Reds did not always endorse the Red position and Blues did not always choose the Blue position. There were four instances in which a majority of Reds endorsed the Blue position, and only one instance in which Blues endorsed a Red position (52% agreed that “Freedom is more important than equality.”) By taking into account “swing voters” within each ideological camp, we discovered that the ideological center in this country is a bit to the left of center.

Where does the country stand?

The graphs below portray the 21 statements that had majority support from the entire sample (whether the respondents were Reds, Purples or Blues). We then calculated the average number of respondents who supported the Blue or liberal position and those who supported the Red or conservative position.

Blue: Percentage of all respondents endorsing the blue position.
Red: Percentage of all respondents endorsing the red position.
Purple: Percentage of all respondents endorsing the blue or red position.

Helping the Poor

It is our duty to help the less fortunate.

Morality

Government is too involved in regulating morality.

Corporate Trust
Corporations generally act without society’s best interest in mind.
Immigration
Foreigners who immigrate to America want the chance to work for a better life.

Abortion Rights
Abortion is a private decision between a woman and her doctor.

Foreign Policy
Our efforts in the War on Terror should focus on addressing anti-American sentiment in the world.

Education

The only way to get better education in America is to invest in public education.

Liberties vs. Security
Liberties are more important than security.

Environment

The government needs to devote more resources to protecting the environment.

Role of Religion
Religion should be left out of public life.

Business Regulation

It is important for the government to regulate business.

Social Security

Gov’t should allow people to invest their social security taxes in private accounts.

American Dream

The government should not help everyone to achieve the American Dream.

Gun Rights

The Constitution gives us the absolute right to bear arms.

Taxes

All Americans would benefit from drastically reduced taxes.

Constitution

The Constitution was meant to be read just as it is written.

Marriage

Marriage should only be between one man and one woman.

Affirmative Action

Affirmative Action rewards some groups at the expense of others.

Evolution

Evolution should be just one part of the science curriculum in the schools.

Gov’t Effectiveness

Government generally creates more problems than it solves.

Freedom vs. Equality
Freedom is more important than equality.

http://www.learcenter.org/html/projects/?&cm=zogby/centerleft

Who’s surprised?

Texas Evangelicals Helped Effort to Stop Palin “Troopergate” Probe

Sean Cockerham, Anchorage Daily News

JUNEAU — New state gift disclosures show it cost Liberty Legal Institute and the two law firms working with it $185,000 to represent six Alaska legislators in an unsuccessful lawsuit to halt their colleagues’ “troopergate” investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin acted improperly in firing the state’s public safety director.

The legislators listed a $25,000 gift of services from the Texas-based Liberty Legal Institute. Liberty is the legal arm of the Free Market Foundation, which is associated with evangelical leader James Dobson’s Focus on the Family, and lists its guiding principles as limited government and promotion of Judeo-Christian values.

The lawmakers also disclosed a $120,000 gift of services from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, a national firm that appeared at hearings on behalf of Liberty Legal.

Anchorage attorney Kevin Clarkson represented the six legislators in the case as well, and turned to Liberty Legal for its constitutional expertise. The lawmakers reported a $40,000 gift of services from Clarkson’s firm.

That brings the total bill for their lawsuit to $185,000.

h/t Kos

Blueberry Hill – the Dennis Potter version

I see the moon

Quick! Check his ears.

New RNC Chair Michael Steele’s sister was married to Mike Tyson.   http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/us/politics/08steele.html?_r=1&hp

 

Ad

The National Review – “boy, we sure know the knee-slapper satire when we see it” category

Dead Hobo Reporting Glitch Claims Another White House Appointee   [Mark Hemingway]

Iowahawk:

WASHINGTON – U.S. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu announced his resignation this morning amid new reports that Alameda County workers had unearthed more than a dozen additional dead hobo bodies at his former home in Berkeley, California. The Nobel Prize-winning physicist had been the subject of a week-long controversy after he amended his White House application form to declare “3 or 4″ hobo corpses in his crawl space, but after this morning’s discovery, Chu said he felt he could no longer serve as an effective spokesman for Administration energy policy.

I shouldn’t have to say this, but in order to head off the breathless emails — yes, it’s satire.

h/t Brad DeLong

The Bush Legacy – the real one

resize

h/t Brad DeLong

Cable news media – the stats on “balance”

February 07, 2009

Cable News Networks Favor GOP on Stimulus, 2-1

Those who hoped that the proliferation of cable news programs would lead to more balanced news coverage for progressives will found no comfort in a report issued last week by ThinkProgress.org:

…In the debate over the House economic recovery bill on the five cable news networks, Republican members of Congress outnumbered their Democratic counterparts by a ratio of 2 to 1.The analysis tallied interview segments about the stimulus on CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC during a three-day period, finding that the networks had hosted Republican lawmakers 51 times and Democratic lawmakers only 26 times.

And in a more recent analysis, not much improvement:

ThinkProgress has found that Republican lawmakers outnumbered Democratic lawmakers 75 to 41 on cable news interviews by members of Congress (from 6am on Monday 2/2 through 11pm on Thursday 2/5)

ThinkProgress notes also that,

Last week, Fox News came the closest to balance with 8 Republicans and 6 Democrats. But the so-called “fair and balanced” network was not able to maintain such a ratio this week, hosting 24 Republicans and only 11 Democrats. The business news networks were particularly egregious this week. CNBC had more than twice as many conservatives, with 14 Republicans and 6 Democrats. Fox Business was even worse, hosting 20 Republicans for just 4 Democrats.

 

Worse, ThinkProgress adds:

Though the imbalance is already stark, the tilt of the coverage would have been even more lopsided if the analysis had been broken down into whether a lawmaker who appeared on TV was a supporter or a critic of the economic recovery plan. Some of the most frequent Democratic guests this week were outspoken critics of the proposed stimulus plans, such as Sens. Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Kent Conrad (D-ND).

Hard to see it any other way than Big Media wanting to undermine the President, whether for ratings or naked political bias. Leftside Annie, one of the more than 500 respondents to the ThinkProgress post said it well: “Liberal Media? Bullshite.”    http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/

As Annenburg, Media Matters, Eric Alterman, Moyers and many others have documented and demonstrated, this propensity of the cable news (particularly but by no means exclusively) to favor the Republican/business community version of ‘reality’ is pervasive and long-standing.  And of course, as these entities are themselves instances of the business or corporate sector, we ought not to be surprised that they function as they do.

Until more of us come to understand that we can only make coherent sense of these facts through some analysis which reflects a Chomskian perspective on these dynamics – and on the significant threat posed to transparency, honesty and American democracy – we aren’t going to get this right, folks.  And it’s important.

Remember this wonderful college softball event?

Last evening, we had dinner with some very nice folks, including the president of Western Oregon College.  A really engaging and humble fellow…and smart as hell (specialty in analytic philosophy).  There was little disagreement when we advanced the thesis that one gender is rather more civilized than the other.

Norquist

I’ve written a small post over on Greg Sargant’s blog on Grover Norquist and I thought I ought to add it in here:

Addendum on above post re Norquist…
From Dibgy:
“California is in deep trouble. The state’s bond rating is now the worst of all 50 states. They are furloughing workers. The place is coming apart at the seams.

And why? Because the anti-tax zealots have achieved their goal — a government that is held hostage to conservatives whether in the minority or the majority —conservatives who will ensure that the government can never function in a way that gives the citizens confidence that it can actually work.”


Norquist is, of course, an ideologue. He likely believes that his extremist anti-governmentalism is somehow “American”. But he, along with so many of those people who have risen with him in power and influence in the movement are also now multi-millionaires. What service has Norquist provided which accounts for his wealth? He’s not moonlighting as a nurse or teacher or wrench-turner. He has been diverting government functions and government monies to the business community and he’s been paid very well for that service.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/stimulus-package/friday-happy-hour-roundup/#comment-1523

Norquist, and the crowd of cronies he is and has been associated with for years (Karl Rove, Ralph Reed, Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, etc) are parasites on government and on America.  They are insulated from financial turmoil and the real suffering of Americans by their personal wealth and connections which they’ve gained through corrupting government functions.  There is no Ghandian self-sacrifice for others here.  All of them have long histories of lying, propagandizing and worse.  In the “bad guy” list, these people are at the top.

George Carlin on the euphemisms of war (the manipulation of language for propaganda reasons)

There’s a condition in combat. Most people know about it. It’s when a fighting person’s nervous system has been stressed to its absolute peak and maximum. Can’t take anymore input. The nervous system has either (click) snapped or is about to snap.

In the First World War, that condition was called “shell shock”. Simple, honest, direct language. Two syllables, shell shock. Almost sounds like the guns themselves.

That was seventy years ago. Then a whole generation went by and the Second World War came along and the very same combat condition was called “battle fatigue”. Four syllables now. Takes a little longer to say. Doesn’t seem to hurt as much.” Fatigue” is a nicer word than “shock”. (Stridently) “Shell shock!” (Subdued) “Battle fatigue”.

Then we had the war in Korea, 1950. Madison Avenue was riding high by that time, and the very same combat condition was called “operational exhaustion”. Hey, we’re up to eight syllables now! And the humanity has been squeezed completely out of the phrase. It’s totally sterile now. Operational exhaustion. Sounds like something that might happen to your car.

Then of course, came the war in Viet Nam, which has only been over for about sixteen or seventeen years, and thanks to the lies and deceits surrounding that war, I guess it’s no surprise that the very same condition was called “post-traumatic stress disorder”. Still eight syllables, but we’ve added a hyphen! And the pain is completely buried under jargon. Post-traumatic stress disorder.

I’ll bet you if we’d of still been calling it shell shock, some of those Viet Nam veterans might have gotten the attention they needed at the time. I’ll bet you. I’ll bet you.

h/t Dennis Hartley at Hullabaloo

Pentagon propaganda, Wolf Blitzer, and media mediocrity

 The Pentagon claim that recently popped up as Obama moved to close Guantanamo — that 61 released detainees have “returned to the battlefield” — has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked.  Nonetheless, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, as part of a fear-mongering segment on closing Guantanamo, just mindlessly repeated the Pentagon claim (and he even added the scary detail that 25 of those 61 “recidivists” have perpetrated an attack in the last 10 months).  As Media Matters notes, establishment journalists are repeatedly reciting the Pentagon’s recidivism claim without an ounce of skepticism, without even noting the ample disputes surrounding this claim. 

The reason defenders of Bush policies rely on such patently fallacious “reasoning” (if X precedes Y, then it means X caused Y — where X = torture/Guantanamo and Y = no Terrorist attack) is because they know that these media stars have neither the ability nor the inclination to devote even a molecule of critical thought to what they’re being told. 

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/  Feb 6/2009